[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/auto
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla |
Date: |
Thu, 8 Apr 2004 08:04:13 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
>Tom> You can arrange coordination with good tools.
> Nonsense. There is excellent reason to believe there are essential
> limits, though I know of no proof. Coordination without hierarchy
> requires communication which is exponential in the number of
> participants, or a market structure which free software inherently
> foregoes. Sure, you can design better structures for general
> communication, but design implies hierarchy (ie, at least a central
> architectural authority), and the ones I know of require some form of
> central control.
Successful tools implement limited purpose control hierarchy.
Successful standards do, too. Some obvious examples are programming
languages, the Linux kernel, and Apache. Take the kernel, for
example: it has coordinated a lot of people who write device drivers.
All I'm saying about c/b/i stuff is that there's a need for improved
standards about the interface to projects' c/b/i system and that in
the absense of a hierarchical command structure from which to say
"Thou shalt support `make install' with the following meaning...."
the tactic to take is to build c/b/i tools that happen to implement
the standards but that are also good enough that a majority of core
projects choose, all on their own (well, with advocacy), to adopt
those tools in preference to auto* and other competing systems.
That has _already_been_done_ for a subset of c/b/i tools. For
example, Python and Perl both have standard install processes defined
by tools that ship with Python and Perl. No, not every package uses
those but a critical core does. You don't need 100% adoption to
radically improve the situation over what we've currently got.
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Tom Lord, 2004/04/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Andrew Suffield, 2004/04/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Robin Green, 2004/04/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Matthew Dempsky, 2004/04/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Andrew Suffield, 2004/04/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Tom Lord, 2004/04/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2004/04/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Miles Bader, 2004/04/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Tom Lord, 2004/04/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2004/04/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla,
Tom Lord <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Colin Walters, 2004/04/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Tom Lord, 2004/04/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Colin Walters, 2004/04/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Tom Lord, 2004/04/09
- [Gnu-arch-users] ping by request of jblack, Matthew Dempsky, 2004/04/06
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Managing changes to projects that use autoconf/automake with tla, Robert Collins, 2004/04/06